path name rules

[John (J5) Palmieri]

On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 20:47 +0200, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> Hi John,
> > Bus names not path names.  It was added to CVS without a patch hitting
> > the mailing list or bugzilla.  At least not one that I saw.  It causes
> > make check to fail as there are some bugs in the validation code.  I
> > will revert things if they don't look like they are going to get fixed.
> > I would rather not add spec changing features because they can cause
> > problems.  If there is a case to add them then I will gladly accept
> > patches for review but, the bar is set high at this point because we are
> > nearing a point where we can say this is 1.0 quality.  Little things are
> > just going to keep us from reaching that goal.
> 
> I personally would say keep the patch and make the author to fix the
> problems. Who added this patch?

Well yes that is the plan.  Waldo added it so I am sure there is a good
reason for it most likely related to his work with the dcop-dbus bridge
but I haven't hear from him.  It illustrates why there is a high bar for
spec changes right now.  Their potential to break things - even if it
seems like a small change means I can't do a release and have to work
around the tests to vet other patches.  It is not worth the energy for
what amounts to an aesthetics change in the case of Object Paths.  If
there is a really good reason to add it then ok, but it needs to be a
really, really good reason.
  
-- 
John (J5) Palmieri <johnp at redhat.com>